From: "Elaine Keown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Your arguments are very calm and rational, but it's > not that simple. I wish it were.
> Some of the sets of symbols I found---which I simply > assumed could be added to "Hebrew"--are innately > controversial because of the Roadmap. > That's actually true for 3 subsets of symbols that I > think of as "Extended Hebrew." How many in total are there? If you have a set of symbols or punctuation marks which are used with several different but related scripts why not propose them as a group? Call the group "Semitic Extended Marks" or something which doesn't tie them to a particular script. Then nobody needs to argue about whether they should be encoded with this script or that script. - Chris
